Any news on whats going on with Bouchard

5 of the old girls already on the market for sale, free and clear of the bankruptcy: Robert J., Ralph E., Buster, Marion C and J George Betz. All have been laid up for quite a while so will need some serious work/repairs, i would think, to pass USCG/ABS.

Was offered a job on the Robert when new, many,many moons ago.

The B220 and Denise are loading at Buckeye Perth Amboy today. So stuff is starting to move.

1 Like

220 and Morton Jr

Just not for Bouchard

Nope working for Unicorn shipping

Unico

On their way to Savannah with that first load.

No matter where they end up, glad to see them (The crews) working again. Mildly surprised that rig was ready to go so soon after the auction. Perhaps a bit of credit is due to the skeleton crew maintaining it during this chaos.

I believe the only units working are the ones that were bareboat chartered.

Mean While Morty continues to be Morty (from court filings yesterday):

PRELIMINARY STATEMENT

  1. Just two days after Morton S. Bouchard III (“Mr. Bouchard”) submitted a
    “heartfelt” letter to the Court over his concerns as to how the Debtors’ sale process “will not result
    in any meaningful recoveries to general creditors,” Docket No. 1120, Ex. 2, Mr. Bouchard filed
    the Amended BTC Claims and the Late Filed Debtor Subsidiaries Claims seeking to leapfrog all
    unsecured creditors and place unsecured creditors in an even worse position than they already
    find themselves. As detailed in the Committee’s original objection, see Docket No. 1024 (the
    “Committee’s Original Claims Objection”), Mr. Bouchard (personally, and through the other
    Bouchard Note Parties) transferred approximately $40 million to BTC and the Debtors’ vendors
    or other creditors from February 2019 to September 2020 to fund shortfalls in the Debtors’
    operations. Mr. Bouchard represented to his personal lawyer and the company’s outside auditors
    that such amounts were not loans, but instead equity contributions. Indeed, Mr. Bouchard was
    prohibited from lending any amounts to BTC under BTC’s loan agreement with Wells Fargo. The Original Proofs of Claim (as defined below) were only asserted against debtor BTC. The Amended BTC Claims now state that the claims are “asserted jointly and/or severally against the Debtors in these jointly administered cases and is secured by the Claimant’s maritime liens on the Debtors’ vessels as described in the annexed addendum.” As set forth below, this assertion of claims against the debtor subsidiaries is not only untimely, but also improperly filed because such claims were not separately filed against each Debtor Subsidiaries. The Committee refers to the purported claims against the debtor subsidiaries as the “Late Filed Debtor Subsidiaries Claims” for convenience and without waiving its objections to the improper filing in violation of the requirements of the Bar Date Order. Only when the Debtors’ bankruptcy appeared imminent did Mr. Bouchard reverse his position
    and instruct his personal lawyer to prepare promissory notes that were then backdated to reflect
    the $40 million of purported “advances” that he had previously made for BTC’s benefit.

  2. Now, when any recovery, much less a meaningful one, for unsecured creditors is
    in significant doubt, Mr. Bouchard has filed the Amended BTC Claims and Late Filed Debtor
    Subsidiaries Claims. Mr. Bouchard now asserts that his equity contributions are not only debt
    claims against BTC, but also are somehow liabilities of the debtor subsidiaries—who were not
    obligors or guarantors of the backdated notes—and that these purported liabilities of the debtor
    subsidiaries are secured by maritime liens. This belated assertion of secured claims is baseless.

  3. First, the Original Proofs of Claim (as defined herein) were only filed against
    debtor BTC, the parent company that does not own any of the vessels on which Mr. Bouchard
    now claims maritime liens. Instead, BTC’s subsidiaries own the vessels. As a result, the
    Amended BTC Claims cannot support secured claims against BTC because none of the purported
    collateral—the vessels—are owned by BTC. Thus, the only way to assert secured status is by
    filing new (not amended) proofs of claim against the debtor subsidiaries. The Late Filed Debtor
    Subsidiaries Claims, however, were filed more than three months after the applicable bar date
    and are therefore untimely. Additionally, “amending” the claims originally asserted only against
    debtor BTC to add claims against the debtor subsidiaries violates the Bar Date Order (as defined
    below), which requires that proofs of claim be separately filed against each Debtor, and that listing
    more than one Debtor in a proof of claim “may be treated as if filed only against Bouchard
    Transportation Co., Inc.” Bar Date Order ¶ 9(e). Asserting new claims against the debtor
    subsidiaries through “amendments” to claims against BTC is a transparent—and impermissible—
    attempt to evade the bar date. The Late Filed Debtor Subsidiaries Claims must be disallowed as
    untimely and improperly filed.

  4. Second, even if the Bouchard Note Parties were permitted to file late claims against
    the debtor subsidiaries—for which they have not even sought the required relief and have no
    grounds to do so—the Late Filed Debtor Subsidiaries Claims fail to meet the basic requirements
    for proofs of claim, as they do not even identify how the debtor subsidiaries have any liability for
    purported notes they are not obligated on nor provided guaranties for. Lastly, there is no basis
    under applicable law for the Debtors’ equity owner to assert maritime liens for “necessaries”
    provided by third-party vendors and suppliers who have been paid.

It’s like Morty is scraping his fingernails on a classroom chalkboard. Running out of paychecks for his attorneys it would seem.

2 Likes

Looks like Foss is taking over the show for Ride Cay
Now they are saying Bouchard employees files and records won’t rollover as originally told but will have to reapply with Foss to keep their jobs or be considered for a position.

FOSS is hiring. Virtually everyone is hiring.

2 Likes

Foss is union for at the very least engineers and deckhands too. That could be an attractive perk for some to deal with the hassle of reapplying.

Any word on what they’re paying?

We were told pay stays the same with increased benefits, There’s a few of us who don’t want to work for Foss

I’m not up to date on Foss pay. Or union status. It’s probably different in different ports.

Some time ago in Alaska, the wheelhouse was non-union at much better than Union wages, but the engineers and deck crew were IBU. At that point MMP Inland was out.

I don’t know about now, MMP might, or might not, be back in for all I know.

Foss doesn’t have much of presence in Alaska anymore. Four boats at the Red Dog Mine is about it.

I suspect that in some ports Foss might be all IBU, and in others all MMP, and in others a mix. But I really don’t know.

Foss is a good company. A world better than Bouchard. Working for Foss should be similar to working for other big companies.

Most foss capts and mates are management (some capts/mates in la/lb are ibu) and the saltchuk companies have a great benefits package w/options for non union employees
from what i have been told.

Most deckhands and engineers are IBU, i know in sf bay some are sup and in LA/ LB engineers are meba.

Generally speaking by all accounts, foss is a top tier tug company and one of the highest paying
generally speaking.

1 Like

These jobs will all be East Coast and Gulf boats managed out of Jacksonville all non union, Bouchard pay was great, Morty not so much
But Foss and Crowley are very much alike it depends on your taste
We were hoping for a smaller management style since Rose Cay only got 10 boats and barges

2 Likes